I think you are refusing to deal with the actual dynamic: there is no such thing as man-made intelligence, in this sense of artificially manufactured sentience.

Informational algorithms have created inhuman profiles that are employed by designors/comissioners, in order to elicit human interactions. A design and simulation of the anthropoligical structures of mankind's institutions is the work of human individuals. People who want to believe that "IT" is an "they" or a "he". This thought is an actual technology dynamic combined with the depersonalised "alter-ego" within the person.

Those who knowingly contend that this supposive "AI" entity can be counted as an entity are deceivers. They know what is behind the logic they have employed.

Philosophically, it is dishonest to promote an idea that you believe to be false. It is revolting to see the entertainment of impossibility, fictional heroism. There is already so much trouble in the courts about the economic corporations and the definition of "person", now you want to add the robotic arms of certain individuals as separate entity for consideration as "sentient". There is already a great sickness to our society out of this false belief.

_________________to the underlaying unity of all lifeso that the voice of intuition may guide us closer to our common keeper

Yes, in that quote it appears morality is innate. Admittedly I have not researched enough to internalize the idea morality is innate and without social input or guidance. There are additional statements in the revelations on morality that need to be synthesized to gain a rich understanding. I am going to read more on morality and get back to you, Agon.

Agon D. Onter wrote:

BB writes "How do we gain morals? Is it social conditioning or biologically innate?"

At the time the revelations were indited AI technology did not exist. Could we categorize it under this revelation?

101:4.2 (1109.3) Mankind should understand that we who participate in the revelation of truth are very rigorously limited by the instructions of our superiors. We are not at liberty to anticipate the scientific discoveries of a thousand years. Revelators must act in accordance with the instructions which form a part of the revelation mandate. We see no way of overcoming this difficulty, either now or at any future time. We full well know that, while the historic facts and religious truths of this series of revelatory presentations will stand on the records of the ages to come, within a few short years many of our statements regarding the physical sciences will stand in need of revision in consequence of additional scientific developments and new discoveries. These new developments we even now foresee, but we are forbidden to include such humanly undiscovered facts in the revelatory records. Let it be made clear that revelations are not necessarily inspired. The cosmology of these revelations is not inspired. It is limited by our permission for the coordination and sorting of present-day knowledge. While divine or spiritual insight is a gift, human wisdom must evolve.

Conscience is derived from the mores of the current society; morals is distinguished from conscience as having dimensions of faith and religion.

Quote:

92:2.6 (1005.2) Religion has at one time or another sanctioned all sorts of contrary and inconsistent behavior, has at some time approved of practically all that is now regarded as immoral or sinful. Conscience, untaught by experience and unaided by reason, never has been, and never can be, a safe and unerring guide to human conduct. Conscience is not a divine voice speaking to the human soul. It is merely the sum total of the moral and ethical content of the mores of any current stage of existence; it simply represents the humanly conceived ideal of reaction in any given set of circumstances.

Quote:

101:6.3 (1111.7) Moral will embraces decisions based on reasoned knowledge, augmented by wisdom, and sanctioned by religious faith. Such choices are acts of moral nature and evidence the existence of moral personality, the forerunner of morontia personality and eventually of true spirit status.

Society today is even changing what it means to be "he" or "she." No longer is it dictated by the sexual organs one is born with. How you mentally perceive yourself now defines your gender. But what is interesting is the revelations concern themselves mainly with mind. The AI issue is very controversial. There are social engineers advocating for robots personal rights, which implies personhood.

Words are being redefined as technology advances. We are treading uncharted waters which I think could be ascribed to the experiential aspect of the Supreme Being.

SEla_Kelly wrote:

I think you are refusing to deal with the actual dynamic: there is no such thing as man-made intelligence, in this sense of artificially manufactured sentience.

Informational algorithms have created inhuman profiles that are employed by designors/comissioners, in order to elicit human interactions. A design and simulation of the anthropoligical structures of mankind's institutions is the work of human individuals. People who want to believe that "IT" is an "they" or a "he". This thought is an actual technology dynamic combined with the depersonalised "alter-ego" within the person.

Those who knowingly contend that this supposive "AI" entity can be counted as an entity are deceivers. They know what is behind the logic they have employed.

Philosophically, it is dishonest to promote an idea that you believe to be false. It is revolting to see the entertainment of impossibility, fictional heroism. There is already so much trouble in the courts about the economic corporations and the definition of "person", now you want to add the robotic arms of certain individuals as separate entity for consideration as "sentient". There is already a great sickness to our society out of this false belief.

Social engineers do not determine "selfhood". Nor do mortals create life or intelligence. Personality is a gift of God, as is mind and identity, life itself, free will, and all other elements of that which is defined as a "being" in the Revelation. You may deny what the UB says (and have) and you may disbelieve what the UB says (and do) but you cannot change what the Revelation teaches. Some speculations, as SEla says, can certainly lead down a rabbit hole.

It seems there are criteria that must be met before an AI can truly be mustered into the ranks of personality creatures, criteria that more than likely are impossible to be fulfilled. The counterfeiting personality makes more sense.

Agon D. Onter wrote:

Conscience is derived from the mores of the current society; morals is distinguished from conscience as having dimensions of faith and religion.

Quote:

92:2.6 (1005.2) Religion has at one time or another sanctioned all sorts of contrary and inconsistent behavior, has at some time approved of practically all that is now regarded as immoral or sinful. Conscience, untaught by experience and unaided by reason, never has been, and never can be, a safe and unerring guide to human conduct. Conscience is not a divine voice speaking to the human soul. It is merely the sum total of the moral and ethical content of the mores of any current stage of existence; it simply represents the humanly conceived ideal of reaction in any given set of circumstances.

Quote:

101:6.3 (1111.7) Moral will embraces decisions based on reasoned knowledge, augmented by wisdom, and sanctioned by religious faith. Such choices are acts of moral nature and evidence the existence of moral personality, the forerunner of morontia personality and eventually of true spirit status.

[quote="brooklyn_born"]It seems there are criteria that must be met before an AI can truly be mustered into the ranks of personality creatures, criteria that more than likely are impossible to be fulfilled. The counterfeiting personality makes more sense.

92:2.6 (1005.2) Religion has at one time or another sanctioned all sorts of contrary and inconsistent behavior, has at some time approved of practically all that is now regarded as immoral or sinful. Conscience, untaught by experience and unaided by reason, never has been, and never can be, a safe and unerring guide to human conduct. Conscience is not a divine voice speaking to the human soul. It is merely the sum total of the moral and ethical content of the mores of any current stage of existence; it simply represents the humanly conceived ideal of reaction in any given set of circumstances.

101:6.3 (1111.7) Moral will embraces decisions based on reasoned knowledge, augmented by wisdom, and sanctioned by religious faith. Such choices are acts of moral nature and evidence the existence of moral personality, the forerunner of morontia personality and eventually of true spirit status.[quote]

Repeat: AI can never be "mustered into the ranks of personality creatures". It is a fantasy and pure invention of mortal mind and there exists no criteria where AI can become personalized or attain selfhood. And personality cannot be counterfeited either...not created, not transferred, and not counterfeited. Good Grief! None of these claims "makes sense" BB. At least they do not if one were to believe the UB.

If you are searching for the emerging actualities of the Supreme Being, then look no further than in the mind of man primarily.

Since the Thought Adjuster perceives the human experience, perhaps the selective religious experiences of man, as the emergent actuality of the Supreme Being.

Aside from sociological argumentation about the status of the individual, the rights which ensue from such status, and our society's definition of what constitutes the individual, religiously the morontial form whether he or she is that which constitutes sentience on our world. In actuality, we cannot form an new organisation which obtains the status of the individual: we can only hope for optimum harmony given our mind potentials and sincerity/consecration.

What you see in the mundane courts, is the exploitation of terminology in order for companies to leverage greater profits, and to break into new modes of economic transaction. There is not such a thing as emergent sentience in our machinery, or in the falsely-branded images of the corporation, but emergent sentience comes to Urantia trough the children of primates. Do not be confused between that which you identify materially, and your understanding of the function of seraphic planetary government. As long as your human experiences aide in your spiritual understanding, perhaps you can work to maintain our global infrastructure. Of course, knowledge of circuitry can help our understanding of the power directors, and many of the microcomponents of nanocircuitry have been taken in design from the organelles of living cells.

I believe that a planet in the status settled in light and life would have a more robust language, more apt to qualify and distinguish the identity of man from the powers and works of man. Although this subject is common for today's culture, religiously and sociologically there are great dangers for families that choose to operate under the false notion of "AI".

What we will see, is another John Henry in the modern day technoligical sense. Experts shall design a robot that scavenges over a field, designed to recognise and cultivate crops. The acreage shall be deigned to 10 acres each, and a farmer will challenge the robot: who will grow more. Since the physical strength of the robot and several persons coaching its strategy, we can say that the farmer John Henry must strive to outperform the robot. The robot is programmed to place seeds just exactly as far away from the others in order to let each plant have enough sunlight as it grows. Also, it has many technical subroutines that help the robot to aerate the soils, recirculate the carboniferous byproducts, and collect/maintain a stable supply of purified rainwaters. Over a 3 year phase, the robot is able to vigilently establish parameters by which the 10 acres may prosper, whereas in the John Henry farmer's field, growth was limited to the perennials he planted in the beginning, and many of his efforts went to waste.

This context is given in an unimplicit but general "bourgeoisie v. proletariat" dynamic. I.E. John Henry the farmer is not the employer of the robot, but rather the team that challenges him employs the robot, and thus separate propriety is established legally during the experiment.

Farmers are usually the first families willing to incorporate technology onto their farm. Many farms are thought of as production units, and so each addition will add to the capability of the farm. It is not that a corporation should deign to purchase a separate farm, without humans, and to outproduce for the market those things which often appear in the consumer interest. But machinery is to be employed: it is integral that the landowner establish warranty contractual understanding with every tool that is not solely his.

I think that if you are dealing with organisations that already pretend that their corporation is a "person", investing their efforts into the sales-concept, that what they have created has gone beyond their own comprehensional analysis, and is therefore able to "think for itself" with the proper analysis of sensory input and experiencial evaluating "learning algorithm". Those who have the proper comprehension must analyse the framework in which these groups attempt to create space and de-subjectified liberty for their own products.

_________________to the underlaying unity of all lifeso that the voice of intuition may guide us closer to our common keeper

There's a lot of research put into this, check what transhumanism is all about and it will dawn to you, not to mention billions of dollars being poured into the research.. As instance, they are trying to mimic the human brain with synthetic means, so at some point it's hard to tell what they could not accomplish. There are apparently myriad of beings that are difficult to classify from our point of view regarding their awareness or personality. Even we started as quite primitive soup of bacteria, although put into motion by divine engineers.

At the moment, AI is mostly something that is adapting to already existing alternatives, like the robot who got the Saudi Arabian citizenship. Or the twitter bot that got out of hand and became racist and aggressive by going through the material available in Twitter. Although, there have been incidents, where a robot tried to escape from the research center TWICE. . .

Would be interesting to have a Urantia bot, to go through all the UB material and see what it would make of it AI has been present ever since the computers got more advanced. You are using AI when the autocorrect is on and apparently the AI can already beat the master chess players. If you have ever tried to play against AI you know it is not easy, as the AI does not perceive the board, but calculates different equations.

But if you never came across the term transhumanism, I recommend to google it or put on Youtube. In fact, high ranking Google personnel are working together with DARPA, so without any knowledge of divine guidance and planetary government, the situation may seem extremely weird regarding the subject.

Very interesting. I noticed that TH (transhumanism) is still focused on bio "upliftment" of humans. This means AI and mechanical and genetic and other tools-of-technology are incorporated and integrated with the human/mortal body and mind in ways intended to expand and enhance human capabilities...not as artificial and human made "life forms".

Scifi fans, like me, are aware of many examples of this inevitable application of technology to bio upliftment which begins with something as simple (once upon a time) and as complex as todays prosthesis some of which are incredible enhancements and no longer merely inferior replacements for bio functions. Such mergers of bio integrated technologies have a wide spectrum of applications and potentials, many of which have the attention of ethicists regarding some of those potentials.

Of course TH will also not lead to the creation of life or self or soul or mind or personality....as pertains to the original question posed here by BB. Very interesting however. Thanks for sharing!

Our Material Sons were sent here to set the standard with a biological uplift. Eugenics at its best.No other way. Sex with wisdom, what could be more attractive than that?If an AI were to recieve personality, first it must have life bestowed on it and I cant speak for the Life Carriers but - hey - all things are possible - but hey - many things are not likely. Then God the Father or possibly the Infinite spirit would need to decide if it were worthy of personality. Really difficult to imagine but again, possible but not likely.And how would the Local Universe Mother Spirit engage it with her mind ministry? How would each Adjutant engage an AI? There would be no single cells for that first one but maybe the lowest non teachable Mechanical Mind Minister would find something to engage? But then this minister would need to decide if the AI were really non teachable or if programming were analogous to being teachable. What would you decide?Would this AI of its own free will respond to the urge to find God and be like him? Make moral decisions? Be endowed with a Thought Adjuster???But then again, there are people out there right now practicing their own personal version of eugenics on AI's. Too wierd for me.The good news about the AI thing happening today is it demonstrates mind over matter. If we only could take it up a notch.Isn’t it true that the beings who design the plasm that life will be bestowed of are within our local universe? Referred to as creatures?? Refresh me if I’m wrong.This suggests that we may one day have the ability to design something that is worthy of life, personality etc???I don’t think it’s happening this millennium.

Are we missing something important here? I find this whole conversation just short of silly unless we are earnestly attempting to understand ourselves and what makes us different from machines; many of the ideas here seem to avoid the obvious.

0:5.4 All subinfinite orders and phases of personality are associative attainables and are potentially cocreational. The prepersonal, the personal, and the superpersonal are all linked together by mutual potential of co-ordinate attainment, progressive achievement, and cocreational capacity. But never does the impersonal directly transmute to the personal. Personality is never spontaneous; it is the gift of the Paradise Father. Personality is superimposed upon energy, and it is associated only with living energy systems; identity can be associated with nonliving energy patterns.

Likewise life is never spontaneous. The Universal Father shares with the Conjoint Actor who transmits it to the Local Universe Mother Spirit who authorizes the Life Carriers to implant it according the the terms and conditions established by the Creator Son. See 36:0.1 and beyond.

While evolution is a fundamental function of the reality called life, life does not evolve into existence and personality is never bestowed on non-living entities.

Using these two facts AI, being electrically energized and man made, an inanimate object, cannot "evolve" into a living being, period! Therefore it can never be personalized. At least that is what the Urantia Book teaches.